It's good to see lawmakers moving to fix one of Proposition 13's biggest inequities - the tax break that treats corporations differently from homeowners.

That break is one of the most unfair parts of the state's tax code. And I should know - I helped write it.

After voters approved Prop. 13 in 1978, capping property taxes for landowners, we had to sit down in the Legislature and figure out how to implement it. One of the biggest questions was how and when properties could be reassessed. We decided that should happen whenever a property was "transferred."

When you sold your home, it was transferred to someone else. The home was reassessed, and the taxes for the buyer were increased accordingly.

What we did not realize was that corporations don't actually transfer property - they transfer the stock in the company that owns the property.

And Prop. 13 didn't apply to stock.

The result is that corporate property that existed in 1978 is still being taxed based on 1978 assessments - even property that has changed hands time and again.

That means a disproportionate burden of California's property taxes is falling on homeowners.

The remedy, as suggested by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco, would be to change the definition of a transfer. With Democrats now controlling two-thirds of both the Assembly and state Senate, they could do that without having to worry about no-tax Republicans.

But they'll have to be very clever at how they go about it - and having someone like Ammiano carry the ball may not be the way to do it.

The problem is that any effort to "repeal" Prop. 13, no matter how reasonable, still has lawmakers quaking in their shoes. What the Democrats need to do is basically make a racehorse look like a donkey.

If I were in charge, I'd come up with a bill redefining that single word, "transfer." And I wouldn't have Ammiano or anyone else with a long history of supporting tax hikes carry the bill - I'd pick the most conservative Democrat I could find and have him do the job.

Every mayor eventually has a "problem" with his Housing Authority director. And the problem is always the same. The tenants aren't happy because things aren't being fixed fast enough, and the workers aren't happy because the director is a bully.

It's the same story over and over. Only the names and circumstances change.

What no one says publicly is that the tenants in public housing are never happy and that the Housing Authority workers usually aren't all that interested in working.

But as long as everyone gets something out of the deal, be it a public-housing unit for a relative or an absence of on-the-job oversight, everyone stays quiet.

The minute a new director tries to shake things up, problems arise.

And if you have someone at City Hall interested in getting rid of the director or taking the director's place, then the "problems" suddenly get a lot of attention.

Everyone seems to have an Oakland crime story these days. Here's mine.

My son Michael Brown was at his store out in the Haight when he got a call from his alarm company the other evening around 6 o'clock.

They tell him the burglar alarm is going off at his house in Oakland and that they've called the cops.

Michael jumps in his car - he's worried about his wife and three kids. He busts his butt to get across the Bay Bridge, but it still takes him about 45 minutes.

Along the way he's calling his kids, but they're not home. He's calling his wife, but she's not home. He calls the cops.

"Yeah, we got the call from your alarm company," they say. "We'll get there as soon as we can."

How soon?

"We don't know, but don't go into the house because the burglars may still be there."

Michael arrives, and sure enough - he can see the burglars in his house! He parks down the street and calls the cops again.

The next thing he sees is a car come to a stop near his house. The burglars load up the car and drive away.

Five minutes later, the cops finally arrive.

Movie time: "Killing Them Softly." Brad Pitt plays the hit man in this gangster movie. He's one of several "A" players slumming in a "B" movie.

No award-winners here, but still good for a bargain matinee.

At the recent "blue blood meets new blood" luncheon hosted by Gary and OJ Shansby at Prospect, the gift for each guest was a bottle of the very noted and elegant Partida Tequila.

When no one was watching, a very noted and elegant author walked away with the whole case.

And it's not the one who writes lots of books.

Holiday parties require a certain amount of etiquette not covered by Miss Manners.

For example, you have to hope you recognize the men and women who have been "worked" to the point that they look like they've joined the witness protection program.

You can't just come out and say, "Great face!" or, "Where did you get that wonderful lift?" But you'd be surprised at the number of women who, in the middle of a conversation, come right out and ask, "What do you think?"